Press Release

Thursday 25 March, 2010

UNHCR study shows uneven examination of asylum claims in the EU

Stockholm, 25 March 2010 – In-depth research by the UN Refugee Agency in 12 EU Member States has found numerous differences in the way asylum applications are assessed. UNHCR calls for practical measures and amendments to EU legislation to ensure fair and effective asylum procedures across the Union. The UNHCR study entitled “Improving Asylum Procedures” was presented today in Brussels.

Adopted in 2005, the EU Asylum Procedures Directive aimed at ensuring that refugee status determination would be consistent across the Union. The Directive sets out procedural guarantees for asylum procedures, including the right to a personal interview, to receive information on the outcome of their asylum claim and the right to appeal.

In many parts of the world, refugee protection is accorded on a group basis. In Europe and in the rest of the industrialized world, asylum decisions are based on individual assessments. The Asylum Procedures Directive governs this process in the EU. The way in which this Directive is applied affects thousands of people seeking international protection in the Union, which registered 246,200 asylum claims last year.   

The UNHCR research looked at how this Directive has been applied in Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain and the United Kingdom. Researchers studied more than 1,000 individual case files and asylum decisions, observed hundreds of personal interviews of applicants, and interviewed asylum officials, judges, lawyers and other stakeholders.

“Asylum decision making is an extremely difficult task,” said UNHCR’s Director for Europe Judith Kumin. “It can be a matter of life or death.”

The study found not only that Member States are applying the Asylum Procedures Directive in diverging ways, but in some cases in ways that may breach international refugee law. “Asylum seekers must have the same chances no matter where in the EU they lodge their claims,” said Kumin. “This is currently not the case.”

Researchers found that applicants were not always afforded personal interviews, or were not given enough time to prepare for interviews or to explain their claims. Interpreters were not always available or qualified.

Decisions were not always individually motivated. Many categories of claims were channeled into accelerated processes, with reduced safeguards. Such practices create the risk that protection needs are not properly identified and persons may be sent back to persecution or serious harm.

At the same time the research confirmed many good practices, such as the provision of information on how to appeal negative decisions, codes of conduct for interviewers and interpreters, careful recording of interviews and of decisions, and good cross-cultural communication skills.

Based on the study, UNHCR proposes practical measures to help EU countries improve their practices, including training of officials in charge of examining asylum claims, and guidelines and codes of conduct for interviewers and interpreters. Some of these initiatives could be undertaken by the planned European Asylum Support Office.

The research project was funded by the European Commission’s European Refugee Fund. It also received a financial support from the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund as well as UNHCR’s German partner UNO-Flüchtlingshilfe.  

The UNHCR study "Improving Asylum Procedures. Comparative analysis and recommendations for law and practice" can be found on UNHCR’s website:
www.unhcr.org/eu